ISLAMABAD: Advocate Imaan Mazari-Hazir has written to the Anti-Harassment Competent Authority (ACA), raising concern over the lack of progress on her harassment complaint against Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and urged immediate action under the law.
In a two-page letter to Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas, who is now the competent authority in the matter, Ms Mazari-Hazir pointed out that Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz was earlier appointed as the authority but was later replaced, and no clarity has been given on what steps were taken during her tenure.
She emphasised that under the Protection of Women Against Harassment at Workplace Act, an inquiry committee should have been formed within three days of her complaint, while the respondent was required to submit a reply within seven days of charges being framed.
She alleged retaliatory measures began soon after she filed her complaint.
Writes to anti-harassment authority about ‘retaliatory’ steps after her complaint
In the case of her client, Mahrang Baloch, the matter was fixed by the Chief Justice himself, and when her colleague informed the court about the pending complaint and requested transfer of the case to another bench, the request was denied. “These facts prove that retaliation is being carried out against me,” she wrote, adding that despite repeated requests, she was not given access to CCTV footage relevant to her case.
Earlier, Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz was removed as the Competent Authority following a hurriedly-issued circular which formed three-member inquiry committee.
Interestingly, Justice Arbab Mohammad Tahir, one of the members of the inquiry committee, objected to the matter being referred to Competent Authority as he was of the view that the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) was the appropriate forum to entertain such complaints.
While defending her assumption of jurisdiction as competent authority, Justice Imtiaz described the courtroom as a workplace under the law. She said that as competent authority she was duty-bound to entertain the complaint under the Protection of Women Against Harassment at Workplace Act.
While acknowledging that there was no specific provision allowing her to include herself in the inquiry committee, she pointed to subsection 2 of Section 3 of the Act, which requires at least one woman member, one senior management representative, and one senior employee. Justice Imtiaz argued that under compelling circumstances she included herself to fulfill this requirement.
She nominated Justice Arbab Tahir and Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan as members of the committee, reasoning that the most senior judges might be beneficiaries in case of any adverse order against the Chief Justice.
However, the matter took a dramatic turn when the IHC administration de-notified Justice Imtiaz and replaced her with Justice Minhas as the competent authority. Justice Imtiaz later suggested that her successor would carry forward the unfinished task, reiterating her view that judges could be tried under the harassment law and that Article 209 of the Constitution did not shield them from such proceedings.
The complaints against IHC CJ stemmed from exchange of arguments in court, during which Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar reportedly warned Ms Mazari-Hazir of contempt proceedings for portraying him as a “dictator” on social media.
Published in Dawn, September 27th, 2025
